Purpose: Define system-level Democracy outcomes and connect them to candidate metrics, source families, comparators, public value, guardrails, targets, gaps, and timeframes.
Phase Boundary: Requirements review and metrics source-method review only. Metrics scoring, report-card use, legislative mapping, issue grades, member grades, rollups, leaderboards, letters, calls, and action tools remain disabled until later approval.
Red text = bad current value, bad trend, missing critical data, or unfavorable gap. Green text = favorable value or improving trend. Amber text = context-dependent, incomplete, or source-method review needed. Neutral/gray text = descriptive value that is not inherently good or bad.
| Requirement | Metric / Measurement | Top Countries / Sources | Value to the American People | Gap / Target / Timeframe |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Requirement ID: DEM-MIS-001 Category: Mission and Outcome / Constitutional Governance Lead agency/component: Congress, Executive Branch, Judiciary, states, election officials, courts Requirement: The democratic system shall preserve constitutional governance, separation of powers, individual rights, representative government, due process, equal protection, and peaceful transfer of authority. Distinctness test: One system-level constitutional outcome; does not combine metric scoring with legal adjudication. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Constitutional governance and peaceful-transfer integrity index Unit: Index / score Period: Latest annual or election-cycle review Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: Freedom House source link; V-Dem source link; World Justice Project source link Automation feasibility: Medium. External indexes are automatable after source registry approval; U.S.-specific peaceful-transfer events require legal/human review. |
Comparable practice / metric: Liberal democracy, rule-of-law, and political-rights indicators Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: Freedom House source link; V-Dem source link; World Justice Project source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Protects Americans from concentration of power, denial of rights, and unlawful refusal to transfer authority. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: The metric must not reward partisan outcomes; it must evaluate constitutional process, rights protection, lawful conduct, and peaceful transfer regardless of party. |
Target: 100% lawful certification, transfer, and constitutional-process guardrails met for federal cycles Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-MIS-002 Category: Mission and Outcome / Public Trust Lead agency/component: Election officials, Congress, courts, executive agencies, public institutions Requirement: The democratic system shall maintain broad public confidence in elections, governing institutions, public decision-making, and the peaceful resolution of political conflict. Distinctness test: One confidence-and-legitimacy outcome; separate from whether citizens agree with policy results. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Public confidence in democratic institutions and elections Unit: Percent / index Period: Latest annual survey or post-election survey cycle Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: Gallup, Pew, ANES, EAC voter confidence evidence, and approved Voice to Congress source registry Automation feasibility: Medium. Survey series can be updated; cross-source normalization requires human method review. |
Comparable practice / metric: OECD trust in government / election confidence and institutional trust indicators Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: OECD source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Shows whether democratic institutions still have enough public legitimacy to resolve conflict peacefully. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Public-trust metrics must not be used to suppress dissent or label lawful criticism as illegitimate. |
Target: Improving or stable public confidence across approved institutional-trust measures Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-MIS-003 Category: Mission and Outcome / Participation and Representation Lead agency/component: Election officials, states, Congress, courts Requirement: The democratic system shall ensure that eligible citizens can participate meaningfully and that elected bodies reasonably reflect the will, interests, and rights of the people. Distinctness test: One participation-and-representation outcome; separate from policy preferences. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Eligible citizen participation and representation alignment index Unit: Percent / index Period: Most recent federal election cycle and districting cycle Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: Census Voting source link; EAC EAVS source link; MIT Election Lab source link Automation feasibility: Medium. Turnout and registration are automatable; district fairness and representation alignment require validated methodology. |
Comparable practice / metric: International voter turnout and representation-fairness context Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: International IDEA source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Makes the right to vote and representation real in practice, not merely available on paper. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Metrics must protect equal voting rights and must not treat lower participation by disadvantaged communities as citizen failure. |
Target: Higher eligible participation with documented non-discriminatory access and fair representation safeguards Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-MIS-004 Category: Mission and Outcome / Rule of Law Lead agency/component: Courts, DOJ, inspectors general, oversight bodies Requirement: The democratic system shall apply laws fairly and consistently to citizens, officials, institutions, corporations, and government actors. Distinctness test: One fairness-under-law outcome; separate from case-specific adjudications. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Rule-of-law and equal-enforcement indicator set Unit: Index / score Period: Latest annual rule-of-law or enforcement-review cycle Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: World Justice Project source link; GAO source link; Federal Judiciary source link Automation feasibility: Medium-low. Index data is automatable; equal-enforcement analysis requires careful human review. |
Comparable practice / metric: Rule of Law Index top-country and peer-country benchmarks Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: World Justice Project source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Keeps law from becoming a weapon for the powerful or a shield for insiders. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Must avoid simplistic comparisons between unlike cases; legal outcomes require context, due process, and evidentiary review. |
Target: Improve or maintain high rule-of-law score with no unresolved high-priority equal-justice gaps Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-MIS-005 Category: Mission and Outcome / Accountability Lead agency/component: Congress, OGE, OCE, inspectors general, GAO, courts Requirement: The democratic system shall ensure that elected and appointed officials can be held accountable for votes, actions, performance, conflicts of interest, misuse of power, and failure to perform core duties. Distinctness test: One accountability outcome; separates official conduct accountability from partisan disagreement. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Public official accountability and ethics traceability coverage Unit: Percent / count / index Period: Latest annual ethics, oversight, and voting-record review Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: Congress.gov source link; OGE source link; OCE source link; GAO source link Automation feasibility: Medium. Records are partly public and automatable; ethics findings and conflicts require reviewer validation. |
Comparable practice / metric: Public integrity and corruption-control indicators Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: Freedom House source link; International IDEA source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Lets citizens see whether officials serve the public, follow rules, and answer for misconduct or nonperformance. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Due process and presumption of innocence must apply; allegations must be separated from findings, sanctions, votes, and documented evidence. |
Target: 100% source-traceable accountability evidence for scored officials and actions Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-MIS-006 Category: Mission and Outcome / Transparency Lead agency/component: Congress, agencies, courts, OMB, USAspending, FOIA offices Requirement: The democratic system shall make public decisions, votes, spending, legal authorities, emergency actions, and program outcomes visible and understandable to citizens. Distinctness test: One transparency outcome; distinct from whether decisions are substantively good. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Public decision and evidence traceability coverage Unit: Percent Period: Latest annual source registry and public-data review Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: Congress.gov source link; USAspending source link; FOIA.gov source link; Federal Register source link Automation feasibility: High for source-link and data-coverage checks; medium for understandability review. |
Comparable practice / metric: Open government / transparency practice indicators Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: International IDEA source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Lets citizens inspect decisions, money, authority, and outcomes instead of relying on slogans or unsupported claims. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Transparency should not disclose protected private information, classified details, or sensitive security information. |
Target: 100% of scored Democracy claims trace to official or high-quality sources with limitations stated Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-MIS-007 Category: Mission and Outcome / Public Results Lead agency/component: Congress, OMB, agencies, GAO, inspectors general Requirement: The democratic system shall produce measurable public outcomes through lawful, efficient, evidence-based, and publicly accountable government action. Distinctness test: One results-and-accountability outcome; separate from political ideology. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Public outcome-to-government-action traceability rate Unit: Percent Period: Latest annual performance and oversight review Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: Performance.gov source link; GAO source link; USAspending source link Automation feasibility: Medium. Public performance data is available; mapping outcomes to actions requires reviewer judgment. |
Comparable practice / metric: Results-based governance and public-sector performance indicators Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: OECD source link; International IDEA source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Shows whether democracy solves public problems, not merely whether leaders talk about them. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Metrics must distinguish government capacity and public outcomes from factors outside direct government control. |
Target: 100% of issue report-card outcome claims have requirement, metric, source, and limitation traceability Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-MIS-008 Category: Mission and Outcome / Democratic Resilience Lead agency/component: CISA, DOJ, FBI, DHS, Congress, courts, state/local partners Requirement: The democratic system shall detect, resist, and recover from authoritarian pressure, political violence, election interference, corruption, disinformation, emergency-power abuse, and institutional capture. Distinctness test: One resilience outcome; separate from ordinary political disagreement. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Democratic resilience risk and mitigation closure index Unit: Index / count / percent Period: Latest annual resilience and incident-review cycle Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: CISA Elections source link; GAO source link; Freedom House source link; V-Dem source link Automation feasibility: Medium-low. Some indicators are public; incident and disinformation evidence requires careful review. |
Comparable practice / metric: Democratic resilience / autocratization indicators Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: V-Dem source link; Freedom House source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Protects democracy when it is under stress, not only when conditions are easy. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Must protect lawful dissent, protest, journalism, and opposition; anti-disinformation efforts must not become censorship. |
Target: All high-risk democratic-resilience findings have documented mitigation status or public explanation Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-MIS-009 Category: Mission and Outcome / Citizen Engagement Lead agency/component: Congress, agencies, public bodies, Voice to Congress Requirement: The democratic system shall support meaningful citizen participation beyond election day through public comment, constituent communication, civic education, public meetings, petitions, hearings, and transparent legislative engagement. Distinctness test: One citizen-engagement outcome; distinct from election turnout. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Citizen engagement opportunity and participation coverage Unit: Count / percent / index Period: Latest annual public participation review Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: Regulations.gov source link; Federal Register source link; Congress.gov source link Automation feasibility: Medium. Public comments and hearings can be counted; quality and accessibility require review. |
Comparable practice / metric: Participatory democracy and public consultation indicators Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: International IDEA source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Keeps democracy active between elections and helps citizens influence public decisions before they are final. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Participation channels must be non-discriminatory and should not expose private citizens to retaliation or misuse of personal data. |
Target: 100% of major Democracy issue pages include clear participation paths and source-traceable engagement opportunities Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-MIS-010 Category: Mission and Outcome / Democratic Leadership Norms Lead agency/component: Elected officials, candidates, parties, Congress, courts, oversight bodies Requirement: The democratic system shall encourage and measure leadership behavior that respects truth, constitutional limits, peaceful transfer of power, public service, institutional integrity, and the legitimacy of lawful opposition. Distinctness test: One leadership-norm outcome; distinct from ideology or policy preference. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Democratic leadership norm-risk indicator set Unit: Index / qualitative risk status Period: Latest annual and election-cycle review Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: Congress.gov votes/actions, official statements where source-review approved, court/oversight records, VTC vote evidence pipeline Automation feasibility: Low-medium. Votes and bills are automatable; norm-risk judgments require strict reviewer rules. |
Comparable practice / metric: Democratic norms and autocratization-risk indicators Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: V-Dem source link; Freedom House source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Protects the culture of democracy from intimidation, deception, authoritarian loyalty, and bad-faith rejection of lawful opposition. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Must avoid viewpoint discrimination; only source-traceable conduct tied to democratic requirements should be considered. |
Target: All leadership-norm scoring remains disabled until vote/action evidence rules are approved Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
After source-method review, import the existing Democracy metrics catalog and replace candidate values with approved current values, trends, formulas, and target calculations.